This is a challenge to the substance of a writ of possession issued pursuant to a petition for ejectment. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. Dennis, Grace, and Tracy Johnson, along with their company, The New England Improvement Company collectively “the Johnsons”, filed a petition for ejectment based upon their claims to the mineral rights in property in Chattooga County owned by Allgood Farm, LLC “Allgood Farm”. This Court affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to the Johnsons on the question of their ownership of the mineral rights.1 See Allgood Farm v. Johnson , 275 Ga. 297 565 SE2d 471 2002. Upon remittitur, the trial court issued a writ of possession. But, the Johnsons moved for reconsideration on the bases that the writ failed to contain a legally sufficient description of the property in question, that the court needed to define “reasonable access” and “unimproved lands” in regard to their mineral rights, and that the writ incorrectly referenced OCGA § 44-9-70. The trial court then issued an “amended order and writ of possession” containing a detailed legal description of the property in question. The Johnsons appeal.
The amended order and writ of possession also contained the following provisions: AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs shall have reasonable access to enter upon the unimproved lands necessary to exercise their mineral rights and for no other purpose; and it is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ access to and use of the Land is limited to what is reasonable and necessary to mine minerals and not otherwise, and it is FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ access to and use of Lands above-described is contingent upon Plaintiffs’ full compliance with OCGA § 44-9-70, et seq ., in reference to Rights of Way for Mining, Quarrying, and Other Business;2 1. The Johnsons contend that the trial court erred in limiting their access to entry to “unimproved lands” without defining “improved” or “unimproved,” thereby circumscribing their future mining activities. They also maintain that the trial court erred by limiting their access to “unimproved lands,” thus allowing Allgood Farm the option to make surface improvements to lands in which the Johnsons’ mineral interests lie and thereby possibly divesting the Johnsons of the mineral interests. But such contentions are unavailing.
